"The Official Portrait of Miss InDiana"

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

While it occurred some 60 years ago, the attack on Pearl Harbor provides vital information for understanding current events.Intelligence Failures Initially, as shown by this BBC special (which contains interviews with some of the key players), America knew of the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor -- down to the exact date of the attack -- and allowed it to happen to justify America's entry into World War II. The case for foreknowledge is even more definitively made by this short essay by a highly-praised historian summarizing some of the key points (the historian, a World War II veteran, actually agreed with this strategy for getting America into the war, and so does not have any axe to grind).

10 comments:

There is an unfortunate increase in 9/11 Troofer bullshit appearing on HFFT. I once enjoyed getting a local perspective on politics with a focus on the libertarian viewpoint. But this is too much. Goodbye, unsubscribing.

The Pearl Harbor "facts" mentioned - aren't quite the way they are skewed by this kind of revisionism.

In 20/20 hindsight, it might be incorrectly viewed as an intelligence failure, but actually the US was way ahead of the curve with crypto-analysis."Highly praised" historian is as highly subjective as their subject matter. His agreement with his own theory is simply self-fulfilling self-justification.

Bah. Humbug. Pffft.

The US actually was vainly hoping for continued neutrality in Asia. It was counter to the Germany First strategy that FDR had agreed to with Churchill.

I could put anybody to sleep with a lengthy refutation of this crappy piece of fiction. Bring beer and chips.

in other words, find something else to bolster 9-11 fantasies with. This one falls flat.

V, thanks for giving us information to back up your opinion. And to think, you can do all that without resorting to calling people names and threatening to withhold a non-existent subscription to this blog!

Glad you are reader. You are welcome to write a rebuttal. It will get published.

"For instance, do you know what temperature it requires for titanium to dissipate?"

Nice attempt to set up a straw man to knock down. Who's claiming that titanium "dissipated" in any of the collisions? And what exactly do you mean by "dissipation" since it isn't a specific term in regards to metallurgy?

I will assume that by "jet engine" you mean the turbines. And I'll repeat the question, who is making the claim that there is no trace of the turbines?

The engine's internal parts were spinning at many tens of thousands of RPMs at the time of the collisions, so it's not hard to imagine that a breakdown in the structure of the engine would cause it to shred to pieces. The pieces would be small and may not be immediately identifiable as parts of a turbine by a layperson, but it requires no fantastic explanation about government cover up.